Short of actually touching people, words can be a very good medium for exchange, but first the speaker has to understand the subject and second, he has to tailor the words to pure simplicity. I think it was Einstein who said if you can't explain something simply, it shows that you really don't understand it. ... But if your explanations are so dense and convoluted that no one really understands them (to me, actually, they are so pointless that they become boring ..

Einstein, was -- well, quite wrong about several important things -- like (what was his technical phrase? -- spukhafte Fernwirkung "spooky action at a distance." ) He disliked that concept SO much he made a thought experiment to disprove it that was so convoluted and so paradoxical -- that it turned out to be empirically true. If that topic was "simply explained" without "dense" descriptions, then you are setting a bar much higher than you know.

On the other hand, he dared to be wrong. He was also quite able to accept his own error when it proved wrong -- in fact he welcomed it. I will patiently await some "deep discussion of the methods" illustrating mine.

FWIW, "the splitting effects of spiral energy rising and falling and entering and leaving all at the same time" "aiki-age rising energy; Aiki-sage sinking and sending over energy; winding energy joining the two up and down and in and out." -- those are ALL in this one straightforward figure I have pointed to before (and its cousin with the stresses more detailed).

The mechanical words I use apply to those figures, and relate them to other equally simple models of modes of action that, while superficially seeming different, are deeply related -- But forget the words and simply see where the joint actions occur and how they relate -- but if you have eyes yet will not see it, I can't help that.